This is part of an email I sent to a friend this morning:

Have you ever met anyone who talks about literature like it was someone that they are in love with? Unpretentiously and just absolutely awed, or confused, or frustrated, but always impassioned and enslaved to their idol? Not someone who spoke about it like it was a roster of important people they knew but only put up with because it made them look better? If I could find somebody like the former, and if I could actually talk about the books I love in that way, I would be really, really happy. I feel so alienated from most people because they see literature in the second way, and not just literature, but education, and ideas (spare a couple of choice ones that they really adhere to). I think I will remain pretty lonely in this way because I don't believe that there are any such people out there, and if I happened to meet one I think that they would probably dislike me because I sound like someone who just likes to own literature, (literally and figuratively) not someone who really loves it.

I apologize to a couple of you, because I know that you do care about the books that you read and I get that in your conversations. Maybe this is all more a matter of taste, because a good many of my friends really love science fiction, and I just can't relate. I like literature that is earthy and immediate; especially literature that inspires social change, or addresses some social ill, or pokes fun at some big ugly facet of society that needs it. Or almost any literature that did the above said things in its own day. More than anything else, though, I think my feeling on literature (and art in general) is that I like to feel moved, challenged, and ultimately bettered (not just in terms of vocabulary and knowledge of the subject, but really a more whole and understanding human being) for having read (/seen/experienced) whatever I just did.

So I guess I'm a literary snob. I know that I sound like one. There is something to be said for reading just to be entertained, but for myself (and eventually my students) I would like that to be the exception, not the rule. In fact, I can only think of one book that I've read and felt it worthwhile that I was not also entertained by (Tess of the D'Urbervilles). For its purpose, I believe it was better that I wasn't entertained.

I suppose this is all at the root of why I want to become a teacher. I really want to teach people, not just about the books that I love, but why they should make real, heavy literature a part of their lives, too. How much the scope of their understanding can be broadened and why it is so important to do so. I also want my students to be able to (and have the desire to) discuss and write about literature as well. Not in the sense of having put it "under their belts,"... only to the end of my having to read endless character sketches and plot synopsizes, but rather in their hearts, and their actions. If this is not the end, then the common opinion that classroom reading is a great waste of time and resources is wholly justified.

The methods are still so impossible that I haven't come across a single one that strikes me as effective in producing the desired end. The methods in common rotation in classrooms today certainly aren't, but I would rather interpret that as a lack of passion and presence of spiritual exhaustion than as a sign that it simply can't be done.

An apathetic majority and an overly zealous, entrenched and ideological minority constitute the political landscape in America today... these two, combined in other twentieth century regimes, have lead to tragedy on an unimaginable scale and the eventual collapse of the society.

In light of this, is exposing society en masse to literature (and thereby a wealth of ideas, historical perspective and human understanding) and teaching them to examine, become familiar with, expound upon, and apply the literature that they consume really such a useless pursuit? It is better, certainly, that we instead drill them on rudimentary systems and examine them in multiple choice (multiple choice and literature? Offensive.), train their minds not to analyze or criticize, but to spit back our own, pre-concocted answers at top speed?

No. But this is currently the norm, even the ideal. This system has robbed my generation (and probably several generations past) of mass zeal for good books... and this powerful new apathy is seeping into every aspect of our culture. We don't vote in record numbers, we don't participate. Our culture is standardized and we regurgitate it, along with all of our billions of dollars to the machine that processes more drivel for us and truly, admittedly, fears the "niche" (read: individual). And all of this we learned, all of this was taught and nourished and eventually set "free" to become our new culture of standardization.

I am certain that I will fail in most cases. I know how entrenched our minds are, and how many other distracting, immediate entertainments can be had without even being sought after. Literature is work. Understanding, dissecting, remembering and sharing ideas is very hard work... but I believe it to be a labor of love. For me, it is a big, passionate love that I would be much smaller and more nondescript without. I hope that I will discover the method to light a huge, literary bonfire under the ass of every apathetic student that comes within my range, but so far I can't even convince my acquaintances of the worthiness of the pursuit.